- I love Intel as much as anyone. They make cool products, they engage in lots of community
stuff, and I mean heck, they're even a major
sponsor of my other channel. But man, when it comes to
confusing product naming schemes, I think Core i3, Core i5,
Core i7 takes the cake. I mean, great question! What is a Core i7 479GK? What the heck does all of this even mean? We'll get to that. But first a bit of
background about why we need product names for processors. Wouldn't it be simpler to just label them with how many gigahertz they
run at and call it a day? Simpler, sort of, but at times
actually even more confusing. For example, when the Pentium 4 launched an equivalently clocked Pentium 3 was actually faster because
it could do more work with each cycle. As a customer, I would expect the product with the higher number
to be the better one! And therein lies the problem. Not all megahertz and
gigahertz are created equal and rating products that way is about like rating
the performance of a car based on what RPM the engine runs at. It's not actually a real indication of how fast the processor is! But it happened. Now one of AMD's attempts
to move away from this started in the early 2000s with their P.R. or performance rating naming scheme where they're processors
were given a four digit model number that enthusiasts believe was based on the performance
AMD felt that they delivered compared to an Intel
CPU of that clock speed. But this fixed nothing. They were still indirectly
naming according to clock speed, and it wasn't until Intel
introduced the Core series, a line of CPUs that
dramatically outperformed their predecessors at much lower clocks, that the megahertz war ended because Intel needed to
shift their marketing away from frequency. So here's what we have today. Other than the very bare
bones Pentium skews, a Core i3 will be your most basic option with two processing cores
and hyper-threading, ore about this feature here, for better multi-tasking. It will have a smaller cache,
it'll consume less power, and it will generally perform
worse than the Core i5, but it'll cost less. Which leads us to the Core i5. I wish I could say it
was as simple as, well, Core i3s have two cores and
core i5s have four cores. The number of cores equals N minus one where N in the number after the little i. (buzz)
But it's not. Mobile Core i5s have two
cores and hyper-threading while desktop ones,
mostly, have four cores and no hyper-threading. But what they all have in common is improved onboard
graphics and turbo boost, more about this feature here, for temporary performance enhancements when your system needs
a little bit more umph. And with umph in mind, Core i7s. Number one, all Core
i7s have hyper-threading for heavy workloads and number two, that's the noise your brain is gonna make as I finish my explanation here. A Core i7 can run anywhere
from two processing cores in an Ultrabook all the up
to eight in a workstation. It might support anywhere
from two sticks of memory all the way to eight and it can have a TDP all the way from around 10
watts all the way to 130 watts. So there is a ton of variety here, and that's for a reason. Core i7s tend to have more
cache, faster turbo boost, and better onboard graphics than the lower tier processors. And I guess other than that, the best summary I can give is this. A Core i7 represents the
best thing Intel could build for a given use case
with the biggest drawback being the higher price tag. So when you boil it down, that's all the i, whatever
numbers represent. Good, better, best within a given segment. Beyond that on their own, they're pretty much meaningless. The numbers and letters afterward sort of mean something if you
use the guide from before. But the safest way to shop is to dig around in ARK
and look at the features, core counts, and clock speeds of the CPUs you're comparing to figure
out how they stack up, with the good news being
that as long as you compare within one brand and within
the same product generation, those metrics will
actually mean something. Speaking if mean, Fractal
Design is back buying up all of my advertising inventory for the sole purpose of
making me do stupid crap on camera for y'all
instead of talking about the great quality and
clean Scandinavian design of their PC cases, power
supplies, and cooling products. Mind you, I don't know who
to be mad at this point, because it was you, not Fractal who posted, let's make
him do the sponsor spot on helium on their Facebook page! I mean, thanks a lot guys! I mean, genuinely thanks
for watching, guys. Like or dislike the video accordingly, leave a comment with suggestions or future fast as possibles and as always, don't forget to subscribe
if you haven't already.
For hardcore enthusiasts, the Core i5 and Core i7 have significantly different feature sets. The Core i7 is geared towards virtualization which significantly improves the performance of virtual machines.
I bought my Core i7 because I was designing Android apps at the time and the emulator can take advantage of CPU virtualization. I still occasionally run the emulator and virtual machines, and also strongly CPU-bound applications where throughput is king.
For most PC gamers, a high-spec i5 will do just fine. That's been the same recommendation with each generation of the Core ix series. Most games nowadays are mostly performance-dependent on the GPU. You just need a processor that can feed it data fast enough.
I wish someone would make this for DSLRs. That shit makes no sense.
How is a 5D III LIGHTYEARS beyond a 7D?
i5 if you want to game and get the best bang for your buck. The i7 will get you better performance but you'll spend about 50% more to achieve a small increase in performance.
What in gods name is going on with the title of that YouTube video...
Short answer: they borrowed BMW's naming convention.
Don't need much more than a 3570k these days to max all games.
Can somebody ELI5 why if you look at the 3D Mark hardware section and look under CPU the top processors are all i7's? Is the benchmark just well optimized and utilizes more cores?
Has Linus been working out? His shoulders look more developed than what I remember and his forearms too. Now all he needs is to add more bass to his voice and he'll be on the cover of magazines in no time.
Everywhere I've gone says that i3s are dual-cores, but I"m running a quad-core i3 apparently, so maybe I'm just a wizard.